Support NeoGAF

[Randall365]

What else is there to say?

It’s like that scene when they approach Camelot in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. They might as well have launched a cow at us, those bastards.

The bizarre thing is that all these tosspots are falling over themselves to shoehorn native americans and indigenous peoples in everywhere - and Britain was actually far friendlier to them than the French (and the US for that matter). Wasn’t Hawaii just ‘put those bloody spears down or we’ll shoot you to bits - you’re a state now motherfuckers’?

The native americans sided with Britain in the War of Independence because they knew the Patriots would wipe them and their culture out… but no - the British are the baddies and get taxed to buy the game - it makes me sick.

 

[Kacho]

Surely this will surpass Civ 5 this weekend? Game seems to be underperforming to some degree.

Edit: talking about CCU

Civ 5 91k
Civ 6 162k
Civ 7 80k yesterday

 

[Hudo]

I'd say IV is peak Civ. The series went on a steady downward spiral after that game.

It's a bit older, but I'd also recommend Alpha Centauri if you were after classic Civ with a Sci-fi twist.

Shame that Civilization: Beyond Earth was mid. Alpha Centauri is probably my favorite 4X game ever.

 

[Varteras]

Friend of mine is a big Civ fan. Said he played it for just under an hour and refunded it. He's gonna wait until they've made improvements and the game sells at $20. He was really disappointed.

 

[Mephisto40]

Been playing this last night, and having a good time with it tbh

Only part that's slightly irritating so far is it's not obvious in the menus which selections are greyed out and why they may be greyed out, and sometimes the tile preview UI is open over what you are trying to read on the screen

 

[winjer]

Surely this will surpass Civ 5 this weekend? Game seems to be underperforming to some degree.

Edit: talking about CCU

Civ 5 91k
Civ 6 162k
Civ 7 80k yesterday

Civ V released in 2010. But Steam only started tracking player count in July of 2012. So those 91k players are not the real peak.

 

[hooijdonk17]

Civ V released in 2010. But Steam only started tracking player count in July of 2012. So those 91k players are not the real peak.

Yeah, Civ V was a huge launch.

 

[Bridges]

I wasn't paying any attention to the marketing of this but I love Civ. I somehow had no idea about the forced faction switching between eras. That disappoints me so much. I enjoy ramping up my small town into a massive sprawling empire over generations, I don't want to suddenly become Mongolia in the middle of my playthrough. Hype is super deflated by this, I'll wait for a sale and/or their first expansion that will inevitably make it a better game

 

[amigastar]

I wasn't paying any attention to the marketing of this but I love Civ. I somehow had no idea about the forced faction switching between eras. That disappoints me so much. I enjoy ramping up my small town into a massive sprawling empire over generations, I don't want to suddenly become Mongolia in the middle of my playthrough. Hype is super deflated by this, I'll wait for a sale and/or their first expansion that will inevitably make it a better game

I don't get this critisicm honestly. Choosing a different nation between ages is not anymore less realistic than having Benjamin Franklin in the modern age. Both approaches are unrealistic by themselves.
I've played over 5 hours until now and honestly i like it. I never was a die hard Civ fan although, which is strange because i love Turn Based Games.

 

[SolarFry]

I wasn't paying any attention to the marketing of this but I love Civ. I somehow had no idea about the forced faction switching between eras. That disappoints me so much. I enjoy ramping up my small town into a massive sprawling empire over generations, I don't want to suddenly become Mongolia in the middle of my playthrough. Hype is super deflated by this, I'll wait for a sale and/or their first expansion that will inevitably make it a better game

Yep. I played it and the change of your civ in the middle of a game is very jarring and unpleasant. And all your cities keep their names, of course. Even if they add renaming, it's quite annoying to have Roman names as Mongolia, for example.

 

[YeulEmeralda]

It’s like that scene when they approach Camelot in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. They might as well have launched a cow at us, those bastards.

The bizarre thing is that all these tosspots are falling over themselves to shoehorn native americans and indigenous peoples in everywhere - and Britain was actually far friendlier to them than the French (and the US for that matter). Wasn’t Hawaii just ‘put those bloody spears down or we’ll shoot you to bits - you’re a state now motherfuckers’?

The native americans sided with Britain in the War of Independence because they knew the Patriots would wipe them and their culture out… but no - the British are the baddies and get taxed to buy the game - it makes me sick.

Yeah one thing Americans don't like to talk about is that the British freed the slaves. First thing the new government did after the Revolutionary war is round up the freed blacks and send them back to their masters.

 

[winjer]

Yeah one thing Americans don't like to talk about is that the British freed the slaves. First thing the new government did after the Revolutionary war is round up the freed blacks and send them back to their masters.

Not only that, but the British tax payer paid to free all the slaves in the empire.

 

[devilNprada]

Wasn’t Hawaii just ‘put those bloody spears down or we’ll shoot you to bits - you’re a state now motherfuckers’?

No..
A pretty good sized majority voted to become a state

 

[InterMusketeer]

I don't get this critisicm honestly. Choosing a different nation between ages is not anymore less realistic than having Benjamin Franklin in the modern age. Both approaches are unrealistic by themselves.
I've played over 5 hours until now and honestly i like it. I never was a die hard Civ fan although, which is strange because i love Turn Based Games.

Who said anything about realism? The complaint is that the premise of the game has changed. The point of Civ has always been to "build a civilization that stands the test of time." This is no longer possible because the civilization you build is doomed to be replaced by another, regardless of your own actions and decisions. It's more than fair to criticize this massive change.

 

[winjer]

I don't get this critisicm honestly. Choosing a different nation between ages is not anymore less realistic than having Benjamin Franklin in the modern age. Both approaches are unrealistic by themselves.

Both of those ideas are really dumb and neither should not be in he game.

 

[amigastar]

Who said anything about realism? The complaint is that the premise of the game has changed. The point of Civ has always been to "build a civilization that stands the test of time." This is no longer possible because the civilization you build is doomed to be replaced by another, regardless of your own actions and decisions. It's more than fair to criticize this massive change.

Realism is the wrong word, maybe immersion is more accurate but if you don't enjoy the game because of it, whatever man. It's your right.

 

[Kacho]

and neither should not be in he game

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I'd say IV is peak Civ. The series went on a steady downward spiral after that game.

It's a bit older, but I'd also recommend Alpha Centauri if you were after classic Civ with a Sci-fi twist.

4 was definitely the best of the franchise but many people liked 5

I have the most fond memories of 2 but that's more a function of how old I am than anything else

 

[amigastar]

I'd say IV is peak Civ. The series went on a steady downward spiral after that game.

It's a bit older, but I'd also recommend Alpha Centauri if you were after classic Civ with a Sci-fi twist.

I would play 4 but i miss hexagon fields in the game.

 

[Bridges]

I don't get this critisicm honestly. Choosing a different nation between ages is not anymore less realistic than having Benjamin Franklin in the modern age. Both approaches are unrealistic by themselves.
I've played over 5 hours until now and honestly i like it. I never was a die hard Civ fan although, which is strange because i love Turn Based Games.

It's not the lack of realism that bothers me by it (well, if I'm honest that does bother me too but that's not the chief complaint). My main issue is the break in continuity. I like starting the game and developing my tiny nation to achieve supremacy. This makes it feel too meta. "I" am the one that wins or loses, not my civ, because I do not have a civ. I am cycling through civs to complete "my story" but what I really want is to complete my nation's story, and that's not what this game does anymore.

Maybe it's a weird perspective to have, and admittedly since I haven't played it yet I could be completely off base and end up loving it when I give it a shot but these kind of changes really take away from what I come to Civ for.

 

[amigastar]

For now i play Civ 7 but when i get tired of it i wanna try Civ IV which people say is the best Civ. I've never been a fan of Civ 5 and didn't play Civ VI for very long.
So my question is whats the best Civ beyond Civ 7?
There are people with 7000hours in Civ IV on Steam, i mean wtf?

 

[Spearheadz]

I've owned every singly Civ until this one. Gonna sit this one out. As stated by others, the changing Civ thing mid-game is absurd to the series. Completely destroys the immersion and feeling of ownership.

Civ IV was the best just for the mods alone. Fall From Heaven is GOATed.

 

[Kacho]

For now i play Civ 7 but when i get tired of it i wanna try Civ IV which people say is the best Civ. I've never been a fan of Civ 5 and didn't play Civ VI for very long.
So my question is whats the best Civ beyond Civ 7?
There are people with 7000hours in Civ IV on Steam, i mean wtf?

Civ 4 and Civ 5 are going to be the default answer for most people. Civ 1-3 are likely too dated for most to enjoy now. Even Civ 4 is pushing it with how dated it is.

Give Civ Beyond Earth a try if you want something different. I hated it but it has its fans. Or give other 4X games a shot. There's loads out there.

 

[Edgelord79]

Eh, not sure. I mean they become really huge games so I can’t see a developer working on next release for 10 years.

But PDX pushes this shit too much. So I just wait a year or more. Hell, Vicky 3 is just now interesting and fun to play finally after 2+ years.

Stellaris (2016 base) - DLC ongoing
Crusader Kings 2 (2012 base) - Last DLC 2018
Europa Universalis IV (2013 base) - Last DLC 2024
Cities Skylines (2015 base) - Last DLC 2023 (hotels & resorts)
Hearts of Iron IV (2015 base) - Latest DLC slated for release for 2025

Yes long term is their plan. They shoot for a decade.

 

[Lagspike_exe]

The more I play, the more empty it feels in terms of content and mechanics. The fact that the Information Age is missing is the most baffling for a supposedly v1.00.
Realistically, this will take at least a year of patches and a major expansion to be where it should have been on launch.

PS5 Pro also keeps crashing, particularly when you build a wonder.

 

[amigastar]

Civ 4 and Civ 5 are going to be the default answer for most people. Civ 1-3 are likely too dated for most to enjoy now. Even Civ 4 is pushing it with how dated it is.

Give Civ Beyond Earth a try if you want something different. I hated it but it has its fans. Or give other 4X games a shot. There's loads out there.

I'm a huge Turn based games fan. I just didn't play Civ series for very long but i wanna change that.
I've played Endless Space 2, Xcom, Galactic Civilizations and a fair share of others etc.

 

[Hudo]

The more I play, the more empty it feels in terms of content and mechanics. The fact that the Information Age is missing is the most baffling for a supposedly v1.00.
Realistically, this will take at least a year of patches and a major expansion to be where it should have been on launch.

PS5 Pro also keeps crashing, particularly when you build a wonder.

I think it's very obvious that with Civ 7 specifically, Firaxis looked at what Paradox are doing and went "Yeah, let's do that as well!". Civ 7 is a DLC platform. The plan is that, very similarly to Paradox' games, you buy DLC for years and years.

 

[winjer]

I think it's very obvious that with Civ 7 specifically, Firaxis looked at what Paradox are doing and went "Yeah, let's do that as well!". Civ 7 is a DLC platform. The plan is that, very similarly to Paradox' games, you buy DLC for years and years.

That is probably their plan.
But it only makes me want to not buy the game now and wait for a complete version, a couple of years from now.

 

[Hudo]

That is probably their plan.
But it only makes me want to not buy the game now and wait for a complete version, a couple of years from now.

I am with you on that. Same reason why I stopped buying Paradox' games. Well... that and also how they just fucking abandoned Imperator: Rome. I am still pretty pissed about that.

 

[Lagspike_exe]

I think it's very obvious that with Civ 7 specifically, Firaxis looked at what Paradox are doing and went "Yeah, let's do that as well!". Civ 7 is a DLC platform. The plan is that, very similarly to Paradox' games, you buy DLC for years and years.

I agree. But it leaves a bad taste when you bought it for $70 on day one. The game is not in a state it should be on day 1.

 

[Wildebeest]

They can't have real British leaders in Civ for balance reasons. Churchill. Too easy military victory. Shakespeare. Too easy culture victory. Newton. Too easy science victory. Brunel. Too easy economic victory. Basically, British leaders are easy mode, and they want Civ 7 to be a hardcore game where you have to beat the game with absolute useless duffers from history like Franklin.

 

[Hudo]

I agree. But it leaves a bad taste when you bought it for $70 on day one. The game is not in a state it should be on day 1.

100% agreed.

 

[Radical_3d]

I think it's very obvious that with Civ 7 specifically, Firaxis looked at what Paradox are doing and went "Yeah, let's do that as well!". Civ 7 is a DLC platform. The plan is that, very similarly to Paradox' games, you buy DLC for years and years.

Civ VI was already that. This one at least has more civs and leaders.

 

[Hudo]

Civ VI was already that.

I remember Civ IV being more complete at launch in comparison to this one. But yes, Civ VI was also going in this direction.

 

[WhiteWaterM00se]

This is a hot take, but Civ Rev 1 on 360/ps3 was an excellent game for a dumbed down console version at the time. It never gets the respect it deserves.

As for Civ VII, I suspect the game will be doing alright around May or so. After a few patches and the Switch 2 version gets released.

 

[HRK69]

Get Age of Wonders 4 instead.

 

[amigastar]

Get Age of Wonders 4 instead.

Age of Wonders 4 is great but its very different from Civilization series i would say.

 

[HRK69]

Age of Wonders 4 is great but its very different from Civilization series i would say.

The fundamental gameplay loop of building cities, researching technologies, and managing an economy is very much the same

If someone enjoys one, there’s a good chance they’d appreciate the other as well

 

[amigastar]

The fundamental gameplay loop of building cities, researching technologies, and managing an economy is very much the same

If someone enjoys one, there’s a good chance they’d appreciate the other as well

Yeah, but it's much more combat focused.

 

[YeulEmeralda]

Okay this may just be my nostalgia talking but the first 4 Civ games felt like it was trying to tell a history lesson.
Now it's just pure gamification.

 

[Radical_3d]

Okay this may just be my nostalgia talking but the first 4 Civ games felt like it was trying to tell a history lesson.
Now it's just pure gamification.

The history lesson of when my marines made an amphibious assault over a Roman phalanx. Yeah… you may no remember those very well…

 

[Wildebeest]

The history lesson of when my marines made an amphibious assault over a Roman phalanx. Yeah… you may no remember those very well…

 

[Kacho]

Looks like yesterday's peak for Civ 7 was it. Unimpressive for a new entry. Could mean lots of fence sitters. Could mean lots of people are turned off by the creative changes, I know I am. Time will tell how successful this game ends up being.

 

[amigastar]

Looks like yesterday's peak for Civ 7 was it. Unimpressive for a new entry. Could mean lots of fence sitters. Could mean lots of people are turned off by the creative changes, I know I am. Time will tell how successful this game ends up being.

We should not forget its also on Consoles which take a good chunk away. But yeah it may be a little disappointing with these numbers, actually.

 

[OuterLimits]

This is a hot take, but Civ Rev 1 on 360/ps3 was an excellent game for a dumbed down console version at the time. It never gets the respect it deserves.

As for Civ VII, I suspect the game will be doing alright around May or so. After a few patches and the Switch 2 version gets released.

Completely agree with you. I still enjoy playing it at times. A simplified Civ game that can be won in 8 hours or less but still has some strategy was a positive to me. Even if I usually prefer the main series.

 

[Sentenza]

We should not forget its also on Consoles which take a good chunk away.

No, it doesn't.
I'd be ready to bet that a VERY minor percentage of the userbase for this type of game is playing on console.

 

[amigastar]

No, it doesn't.
I'd be ready to bet that a VERY minor percentage of the userbase for this type of game is playing on console.

But, you don't know for sure

 

[WhiteWaterM00se]

Completely agree with you. I still enjoy playing it at times. A simplified Civ game that can be won in 8 hours or less but still has some strategy was a positive to me. Even if I usually prefer the main series.

Absolutely! It was also the easiest Civ to teach to young people or people who haven’t played Civ in a long time. Civ Rev was my first Civ since Civ III.

I was surprised this didn’t come to Switch after the success of Civ VI. It would have spoken to a different audience for the reasons you mentioned.

I actually feel the same about the first Xcom Enemy Unknown and Enemy Within on Xbox 360 as well.

 

[Radical_3d]

So. The intro. That’s it. Cool.

 

[amigastar]

Seems like hating on a new civ games is kinda a tradition in Civ universe.